Latest news with #KeithOBrien
BreakingNews.ie
a day ago
- Business
- BreakingNews.ie
Two people allegedly involved in surveillance of HR firm 'spy' are named in court
Two people who were allegedly involved in surveilling and harassing the man at the centre of the "spying" row between two rival HR giants have been added as defendants in a High Court case related to the affair. Retired private investigator Mark Murran, otherwise known as Rock Investigations, was allegedly the driver of a car involved in following and surveilling Keith O'Brien, a former Dublin-based payroll manager with Rippling, a US-headquartered multibillion-dollar HR software provider, the court heard. Advertisement Cliona Woods of Dublin-based Gotham Services was allegedly involved in organising "discreet surveillance". Both were joined as defendants in Mr O'Brien's action over the matter. Both "categorically refute" Mr O'Brien's allegations of intimidation and harassment and say the surveillance was discreet, their barrister John O'Regan told the court on Tuesday. The case was back before Mr Justice Brian Cregan to deal with a number of applications in advance of the hearing of the case, including changing the defendants from "persons unknown" to the two named defendants. It was also back in to consider whether Deel Inc, the other US based HR firm involved, should also be joined to the case. Deel allegedly paid Mr O'Brien, of Balrothery in north Dublin, to pass on Rippling's trade secrets to it, a claim it denies. Advertisement Imogen McGrath SC, for Mr O'Brien, said the defendants had consented to an order not to surveil Mr O'Brien pending determination of the proceedings. Counsel said she was not making an application to join Deel as the purpose of the case was to resolve the dispute between her client and the defendants. There may also be a third defendant but her side needed time to write to that potential defendant, she said. Counsel also said there was a significant dispute over whether the surveillance amounted to harassment, which the defendants say it did not. Mr Justice Cregan said he had been mulling over the issue and he was considering joining Deel at the motion of the court. While this was against the wishes of the O'Brien side, he did it in the context of an earlier claim that the surveillance was an interference with the administration of justice as Mr O'Brien is a defendant and witness in separate proceedings being brought over the alleged spying affair by Rippling against Deel. Advertisement It was also in circumstances where Deel's lawyers had, in a pre-litigation letter in reply to Mr O'Brien's solicitor, said it had no knowledge of the particular alleged surveillance being carried out. "Now that letter is either a blatant lie or a misrepresentation", the judge said. He said the defendants were employed by Deel, which meant it was directly implicated. Ms McGrath asked the court to first allow the parties (her client and Deel) to exchange pleadings in the normal way. Paul Gardiner SC, for Deel, said he took "grave exception to what the court said". He believed the court should not be pronouncing on a letter as misrepresentation until it had heard all the facts. His side had written that letter according to what it believed to be true at the time, he said. Advertisement If the plaintiff says it did not want Deel joined, it was not for the court to say it should, he said. His client had actually invited the O'Brien side to do so, but it chose not to. Counsel also pointed out that Mr O'Brien has entered into a cooperation agreement with Rippling, has agreed not to seek any reliefs against him in the separate Rippling/Deel case and has waived all claims against him. Ireland HR firm Deel admits it instructed 'discreet' surve... Read More The judge said he knew that joining a defendant to proceedings at the court's own motion was an exceptional jurisdiction, but that was in the circumstances of the allegations of intimidation and a letter which appeared to be manifestly misleading. He said he wanted to reflect on the matter and will decide at the end of the week whether to hear submissions from the parties on the issue. Advertisement He also said, given that Mr Gardiner accepted the letter was incorrect, he did not see why counsel took "such umbrage at my interpretation". Ms McGrath said she thought Mr Gardiner "is making a mountain out of a very small molehill". He continued the injunctions restraining surveillance of Mr O'Brien and requiring the defendants to preserve any evidence which may be used in the case. He would also hear an application on Friday by the defendants requiring Mr O'Brien to preserve evidence.
Irish Times
a day ago
- Business
- Irish Times
Two people allegedly involved in surveillance of man at centre of HR firms ‘spying' dispute named
Two people who were allegedly involved in surveilling and harassing the man at the centre of the 'spying' row between two rival HR giants have been added as defendants in a High Court case related to the affair. Retired private investigator, Mark Murran, otherwise known as Rock Investigations, was allegedly the driver of a car involved in following and surveilling Keith O'Brien, a former Dublin based payroll manager with Rippling, a US-headquartered multibillion-dollar HR software provider, the court heard. Cliona Woods of Dublin based Gotham Services was allegedly involved in organising 'discreet surveillance'. Both were joined as defendants in Mr O'Brien's action over the matter. Both 'categorically refute' Mr O'Brien's allegations of intimidation and harassment and say the surveillance was discreet, their barrister John O'Regan told the court on Tuesday. READ MORE The case was back before Mr Justice Brian Cregan to deal with a number of applications in advance of the hearing of the case, including changing the defendants from 'persons unknown' to the two named defendants. It was also back in to consider whether Deel Inc, the other US based HR firm involved, should also be joined to the case. Deel allegedly paid Mr O'Brien, of Balrothery in north Dublin, to pass on Rippling's trade secrets to it, a claim it denies. Imogen McGrath SC, for Mr O'Brien, said the defendants had consented to an order not to surveil Mr O'Brien pending determination of the proceedings. Counsel said she was not making an application to join Deel as the purpose of the case was to resolve the dispute between her client and the defendants. There may also be a third defendant but her side needed time to write to that potential defendant, she said. Counsel also said there was a significant dispute over whether the surveillance amounted to harassment which the defendants say it did not. Mr Justice Cregan said he had been mulling over the issue and he was considering joining Deel at the motion of the court. While this was against the wishes of the O'Brien side, he did it in the context of an earlier claim that the surveillance was an interference with the administration of justice as Mr O'Brien is a defendant and witness in separate proceedings being brought over the alleged spying affair by Rippling against Deel. It was also in circumstances where Deel's lawyers had, in a pre-litigation letter in reply to Mr O'Brien's solicitor, said it had no knowledge of the particular alleged surveillance being carried out. 'Now that letter is either a blatant lie or a misrepresentation', the judge said. He said the defendants were employed by Deel which meant it was directly implicated. Ms McGrath asked the court to first allow the parties (her client and Deel) to exchange pleadings in the normal way. Paul Gardiner SC, for Deel, said he took 'grave exception to what the court said'. He believed the court should not be pronouncing on a letter as misrepresentation until it had heard all the facts. His side had written that letter according to what it believed to be true at the time, he said. If the plaintiff says it did not want Deel joined, it was not for the court to say it should, he said. His client had actually invited the O'Brien side to do so but it chose not to. Counsel also pointed out that Mr O'Brien has entered into a co-operation agreement with Rippling, has agreed not to seek any reliefs against him in the separate Rippling/Deel case and has waived all claims against him. The judge said he knew that joining a defendant to proceedings at the court's own motion was an exceptional jurisdiction but that was in the circumstances of the allegations of intimidation and a letter which appeared to be manifestly misleading. He said he wanted to reflect on the matter and will decide at the end of the week whether to hear submissions from the parties on the issue. He also said given that Mr Gardiner accepted the letter was incorrect, he did not see why counsel took 'such umbrage at my interpretation'. Ms McGrath said she thought Mr Gardiner 'is making a mountain out of a very small molehill'. He continued the injunctions restraining surveillance of Mr O'Brien and requiring the defendants to preserve any evidence which may be used in the case. He would also hear an application on Friday by the defendants requiring Mr O'Brien to preserve evidence.
BreakingNews.ie
25-06-2025
- Business
- BreakingNews.ie
Deel admits it instructed 'discreet' surveillance on spy case man
One of the companies in the international HR firms' "spy" dispute instructed that "discreet" surveillance be carried out on the Irish payroll compliance manager at the centre of High Court proceedings over the affair, a High Court judge has been told. US headquartered Deel Inc, which allegedly recruited Dublin man Keith O'Brien to pass on trade secrets to it from his employer Rippling, also headquartered in the US, did not instruct that there be covert or intimidatory surveillance on Mr O'Brien, Mr Justice Brian Cregan was told. Advertisement Last Friday, Mr O'Brien, of Balrothery in north Dublin, was granted a one side only represented injunction preventing "persons unknown", who were seen driving two different cars in the vicinity of Mr O'Brien's home and workplace, from harassing or intimidating him by following, photographing and recording him or members of his family. They were also restrained from attending within one kilometre of those places. The case was against persons unknown because his lawyers did not, at that stage, know the identities of the owners/drivers of the vehicles. The court was also told by Imogen McGrath SC, for Mr O'Brien, that it was believed the people involved were working for Deel and the conduct was designed to intimidate him because he had agreed to cooperate with Rippling in a separate case it is bringing over the spy affair against Deel and Mr O'Brien. Advertisement The court heard however that, in response to requests to desist, Deel's solicitors Hayes LLP had written to say their client had "no knowledge" of surveillance by any persons in the vehicles identified. On Wednesday, when the case returned to the High Court, Ms McGrath said there had been dramatic developments over the previous 24 hours. The identities associated with the two cars had been provided and the owner/driver of one car allegedly seen in one incident, a couple who attended court, were not involved in any surveillance and the case against them was being discontinued, counsel said. The driver of the second vehicle, which was involved in five other alleged incidents of following and surveilling, had also come forward. Advertisement John O'Regan BL, for the second driver, asked the judge that his client's name be anonymised until he is able to make a formal application in this respect. Counsel said the application will be in accordance with case precedent or statute law because his client has significant health issues and operates "in the sphere of surveillance", and revealing his identity could put his safety at risk and damage his business. Counsel also asked the case be put back as his client, while refuting Mr O'Brien's claims, wanted to come to a practical agreement in relation to the court orders. Mr Justice Cregan said he was prepared to hear the application for anonymisation of the defendant but was reluctant to make an order in relation to that at this stage. Advertisement The court heard that while Deel was not a defendant in Mr O'Brien's action, which includes a claim for damages, the judge had directed that their lawyers attend court on Wednesday to say why they should or should not be a party. Paul Gardiner SC, for Deel, told the judge his client had instructed that "discreet surveillance" be carried out on Mr O'Brien, but there was no question that it should be covert and used to intimidate or harass him. "My client (Deel) engaged with Person B (to carry out surveillance) and unknown to us, they engaged Person A and Deel was not involved in instructing anyone to carry out intimidation, and we refute that", he said. The judge said given Deel's solicitors' response to requests to desist from Mr O'Brien's lawyers of having "no knowledge" of those involved in following him, it "could be interpreted as being economical with the verité (truth)". Advertisement Mr Gardiner replied his side only ascertained the actual position over the weekend. He also said his client was agreeable to not surveilling Mr O'Brien any further, and if he wished that Deel should be a defendant, he should serve papers to that effect. Ms McGrath, for Mr O'Brien, said they would have to consider that as they would need to see what instructions, including text messages, Deel gave to Person B to carry out the surveillance. The judge continued the injunctions and adjourned the matter for a week.
Yahoo
21-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Rippling spy says men have been following him, and his wife is afraid
If becoming a spy sounds like an exciting way to live like a le Carré character, let this newest affidavit from confessed Rippling spy Keith O'Brien serve as a warning. On Friday, an Irish judge granted O'Brien a restraining order against several men who have not yet been identified, according to the court order seen by TechCrunch. O'Brien testified that multiple men — two in a gray Skoda Superb on one occasion, and more often, a short-haired, heavy-set man in a black SUV, sometimes accompanied by a large dog — had repeatedly followed his car and watched his home. O'Brien's story has captured the imagination of the tech industry after his colorful confession in April, in which he alleged that he was a spy for Deel. He said he was paid €5,000 a month to steal Rippling's internal data on everything from products to customers. Rippling caught him by setting up a honeypot Slack channel. On the day he was caught, O'Brien pretended to flush his phone down the corporate toilet and later smashed it, dropping pieces down the drain at his mother-in-law's house, according to his affidavit. Now he's the star witness for Rippling in its lawsuit against Deel. Rippling is even picking up the tab for his legal and related expenses, its lawyers testified. Deel is also countersuing Rippling, claiming it was spied on too, by a Rippling employee impersonating a customer. The two HR tech companies have been bitter rivals for years after Deel — once a Rippling customer — began offering competing products. In the latest part of the saga, O'Brien testified that he tried to lose the black SUV following his car by making sudden turns and taking roundabout ways to get home, only to see it reappear in his rearview mirror. He hired a security consulting company and feared that someone was placing tracking devices on his car. O'Brien claims all of these incidents have created 'emotional and psychological' damage for himself and his wife. 'We have been experiencing anxiety at home and in public. It has affected our sleep and our concentration,' O'Brien said in his latest affidavit. They are fearful for the safety of their four children. He and his lawyer speculated that this was intended as harassment related to his role as star witness. However, O'Brien's lawyer also admitted in court that they had no evidence tying the men to Deel. Deel also denied knowing anything about the man in the black SUV. According to the Irish publication Business Post, when granting the injunction, the judge apparently said, 'As if they are in a 1970s cops and robbers' TV show. Whatever happens in the dueling court cases, O'Brien has made himself the rope in a bitter tug of war between these two well-funded HR startups. And from what he says in his testimony, it sounds painful. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
TechCrunch
20-06-2025
- Business
- TechCrunch
Rippling spy says men have been following him, and his wife is afraid
If becoming a spy sounds like an exciting way to live like a Le Carré character, let this newest affidavit from confessed Rippling spy Keith O'Brien serve as a warning. On Friday, an Irish judge granted O'Brien a restraining order against several men who have not yet been identified, according to the court order seen by TechCrunch. O'Brien testified that multiple men – two in a gray Skoda Superb on one occasion, and more often, a short-haired, heavy-set man in a black SUV, sometimes accompanied by a large dog – had repeatedly followed his car and watched his home. O'Brien's story has captured the imagination of the tech industry after his colorful confession in April, in which he alleged that he was a spy for Deel. He said he was paid €5,000 a month to steal Rippling's internal data on everything from products to customers. Rippling caught him by setting up a honeypot Slack channel. On the day he was caught, O'Brien pretended to flush his phone down the corporate toilet and later smashed it, dropping pieces down the drain at his mother-in-law's house, according to his affidavit. Now he's the star witness for Rippling in its lawsuit against Deel. Rippling is even picking up the tab for his legal and related expenses, its lawyers testified. Deel is also countersuing Rippling, claiming it was spied on too, by a Rippling employee impersonating a customer. The two HR tech companies have been bitter rivals for years after Deel – once a Rippling customer – began offering competing products. In the latest part of the saga, O'Brien testified that he tried to lose the black SUV following his car by making sudden turns and taking roundabout ways to get home, only to see it reappear in his rearview mirror. He hired a security consulting company and feared that someone was placing tracking devices on his car. O'Brien claims all of these incidents have created 'emotional and psychological' damage for himself and his wife. 'We have been experiencing anxiety at home and in public. It has affected our sleep and our concentration,' O'Brien said in his latest affidavit. They are fearful for the safety of their four children. He and his lawyer speculated that this was intended as harassment related to his role as star witness. However, O'Brien's lawyer also admitted in court that they had no evidence tying the men to Deel. Deel also denied knowing anything about the man in the black SUV. Techcrunch event Save $200+ on your TechCrunch All Stage pass Build smarter. Scale faster. Connect deeper. Join visionaries from Precursor Ventures, NEA, Index Ventures, Underscore VC, and beyond for a day packed with strategies, workshops, and meaningful connections. Save $200+ on your TechCrunch All Stage pass Build smarter. Scale faster. Connect deeper. Join visionaries from Precursor Ventures, NEA, Index Ventures, Underscore VC, and beyond for a day packed with strategies, workshops, and meaningful connections. Boston, MA | REGISTER NOW According to the Irish publication Business Post, when granting the injunction, the judge apparently said, 'As if they are in a 1970s cops and robbers' TV show. Whatever happens in the dueling court cases, O'Brien has made himself the rope in a bitter tug of war between these two well-funded HR startups. And from what he says in his testimony, it sounds painful.
